av8r wrote:

Now that was funny. Hope you got good A.O.P.A. rates. I've never sat
in(or on?) a trike before, let alone fly one.

Hiya Chris,

Forgive me for being somewhat hesitant to respond since this
is so far off the original topic, but after seeing all the other
off-topic, political crap on this NG I figured what the heck, why not?
Besides, at least it has *something* to do with military aviation
because as I mentioned previously, ultralight trikes have roots
firmly planted in military aviation history dating back to NASA's
Paresev, a late 50's-early 60's research aircraft based on the
Rogallo wing:

http://members.lycos.co.uk/hglide/Aus.htm

Anyway, if you're interested in trikes Chris, there was a decent
article about trikes in the July, 2003 issue of "Flying" magazine by
Lane Wallace. (Incidently, the triker whom she flew with happened
to be one of your fellow Canadians from Ontario.) After her
introductory flight in a trike, Wallace came to understand why so
many trikers are, "complex GA aircraft pilots, airline pilots and
military aviators." In other words, not unlike a fighter, you don't
merely "fly" a trike, you strap it on and work the controls as an
extension of your own body. And I mean that in the most truest, most
literal sense possible as your arms, legs, hands and feet are integral
components of the machine itself.

Unlike a conventional airplane that you can turn on the autopilot
then sit back and simply let the airplane fly itself, in a trike
that's not possible because you ARE the airplane. Your
arms serve as the pushrods, cables, pulleys, servos and hydraulic
actuators controlling the aircraft about all three pitch, yaw and roll
axes. Since both arms are busy, you must use your right foot to
control the throttle and your left foot to control the brakes similar
to how you manipulate the accelerator and brake pedals when driving
your car. This enables you to use your upper body muscles for
crankin' and bankin' in the sky while you simultaneously and
instantaneously manipulate the throttle using your right foot. It's
truly a total-body type of experience and students are often surprised
to find out how much fun it is despite how sore their muscles are
after their first few lessons.

They are not very common in this part of Ontario. Maybe it's something
to do with the 60 below zero temperatures and howling whiteouts. Say,
I reckon they don't get much snow down your way do they. For the longest
time, I thumbed my nose at ultralights and particularly microlights. I've had
a 180 degree turn of opinion.

I've flown a lot of types (I'm checked out on 9) of aircraft including
stick time on the old Canadair CP-107 Argus, but being strapped on to a
Challenger ultralight is incredible. You have interchangeable wings
(short and long) and you can fly it on wheels, skis of floats. It'll
land on a dime and give you back a nickel's change. Have you worked out
an hourly operating rate yet on your trike. I betcha it's only a few
bucks an hour at best. Are the insurance premiums very high

The Challenger ultralight is an entirely different animal. Trikes are
a seperate breed unto themselves and handle completely unlike
anything else. Everything is BACKWARDS in trike -- you push forward
to go up and pull back to go down, push left to go right and push
right to go left. Control reversals near the ground is the reason
why so many pilots, regardless of skill or experience level, have
seriously injured or killed themselves in trikes.

With regards to the Challenger ultralight, up there in Tundra Land
I can certainly understand why you would prefer something like a
Challenger with its fully-enclosed cockpit. But the Challenger is a
relatively old design dating back to the early 80's. As an A&P
mechanic, there are many aspects of its somewhat stodgy design
that, IMO, could use a quite bit of upgrading. For example:

* The inverted engine makes it more prone to flooding (more difficult
to start) and fouling the spark plugs.

* It uses an old-style belt-driven redrive instead of the more
advanced and maintenence-free all metal type gearbox.

* The design itself doesn't allow for a more powerful engine to be
installed due to a serious lack of clearance between the pusher
propeller and the airframe.

* The airframe has cheesy pop-rivets all over the place and the
landing gear is exceptionally weak, esp. compared to the beefy,
triangulated landing gear and super strong suspension systems
found on most trikes.

* The thing seems to have been designed by dwarves and most guys
over 6-ft. tall need a shoehorn to climb in and out of the cockpit.

* They remind me of Aeronca Champs with that ugly two-tone orange
fish-gill paint job on the belly.

As Lane Wallace mentioned in her "Flying" mag article, most trikers
who fly the higher performing, certified and premium brands of trikes
(like my Pegasus 912 experimental trike) are generally highly
experienced aviators from professional pilot backgrounds. Some
of us regard the Challenger and other conventional ultralights as
basically entry level junk for wannabes (present company excluded,
of course! ) Either that, or close-minded "old farts" who lost their
medicals, or girly girls and other assorted pussys [insert smiley face
here] who lack the significant amount of upper-body strength and motor
skills required to safely operate a trike in adverse weather
conditions. Compared to others types of A/C, very few females are
into triking (Ms. Wallace loved her ride, but admitted that she
doesn't plan to trade in her Grumman Cheetah for a trike anytime
soon!) and those females who do take up the sport tend to fly only
when the winds are calm.

The bottom line is that if I had to fly a Challenger or similiar type
ultralight with conventional controls with an enclosed cockpit, then
you might as well put me back in a GA airplane.

It is a beautiful sport and remember, ya' have to LEAVE the vehicle
to experience the environment!

'Happy Flying'

Back 'atcha

Cheers...Chris